Abrams et al v. Hairston et al
| Brian Abrams and Patricia Abrams |
| Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak and Jacque Bethke Tessendorf |
| 1:2022cv01320 |
| March 14, 2022 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Marvin E Aspen |
| John Robert Blakey |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 22 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: The Court denies Plaintiffs' motion to remand #12 . In seeking a remand to state court, Plaintiff argues that the parties' diversity of citizenship is not clearly established. Not so. Plaintiffs' state court complaint alleged facts demonstrating diversity, and Defendants confirm those allegations in response to the motion to remand. Everyone agrees that Plaintiffs are citizens of Illinois and Defendants are citizens of Wisconsin (Hairston and Bethke) and Arizona (Sedlak). They are diverse. As for the amount in controversy, although Defendants bear the burden of establishing that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, that burden "is not that high"; a "good-faith estimate is acceptable if it plausible and adequately supported by the evidence." Majchrzak by & through Majchrzak v. Gap, Inc., No. 17-CV-06604, 2018 WL 2220292, at *4 (N.D. Ill. May 15, 2018) (quoting Oshana v. CocaCola Co., 472 F.3d 506, 511 (7th Cir. 2006)). Defendants' estimate here finds support in Plaintiffs' allegations. Plaintiffs' state court complaint alleges that Defendants engaged in a pricing scheme, fraudulently inducing Plaintiffs to pay for furniture and fixtures at inflated prices sometimes as high as 400% the agreed upon price. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants repeatedly solicited business from them; that they gave Defendants a $30,525 deposit on 3/31/21 and gave Defendants access to a "retainer" in the amount o $90,000. See [1-1] 24, 25. Plaintiffs allege that, despite repeated demands, they have not received the return of the $90,000 or any portion thereof. Id. 26. Because Plaintiffs sue for actual damages, these allegations certainly suggest that Plaintiffs are seeking to recover, at a minimum, their $90,000 retainer, thereby satisfying 1332. In their remand motion, Plaintiffs claim they are simply seeking the difference between what Defendants charged them for the furniture they purchased and the amount they should have been charged, which they argue is far less than $75,000. Significantly, however, they have not offered to stipulate that they will seek less than $75,000 in damages. Additionally, they seek punitive damages and fees and costs, further suggesting that the amount in controversy satisfies 1332. If Defendants wish to renew their motion to compel arbitration, they may do so by 5/24/22. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 21 REPLY by Brian Abrams, Patricia Abrams to response in opposition to motion, #18 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Affidavit)(Scott, Daniel) |
| Filing 20 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Telephonic motion hearing held on 5/5/2022. Based upon the representation of the parties, Defendant's motion to compel arbitration #15 is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff's motion to remand #12 is taken under advisement and the Court will rule by separate order after briefing is completed. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 19 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Oral agreed motion to proceed via telephone for the 5/5/2022 hearing is granted. Parties shall call into 877-402-9753 and utilize participant code 9955840. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 18 RESPONSE by Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak, Jacque Bethke Tessendorfin Opposition to MOTION by Plaintiffs Brian Abrams, Patricia Abrams to remand #12 Defendants' Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5)(Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 17 STATUS Report Joint Initial Status Report by Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak, Jacque Bethke Tessendorf (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE of Motion by W. Anthony Andrews for presentment of motion to compel #15 before Honorable John Robert Blakey on 5/5/2022 at 11:00 AM. (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 15 MOTION by Defendants Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak, Jacque Bethke Tessendorf to compel Arbitration (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3)(Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 14 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiffs Brian Abrams, Patricia Abrams by Daniel P. Scott (Scott, Daniel) |
| Filing 13 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Plaintiffs' motion to remand #12 for lack of jurisdiction shall be briefed as follows: Defendants shall respond by 5/3/2022, and Plaintiffs shall reply by 5/10/2022. The Court will rule in due course. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 12 MOTION by Plaintiffs Brian Abrams, Patricia Abrams to remand (Attachments: #1 Notice of Filing)(Scott, Daniel) |
| Filing 11 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Defendant's motion for extension of time to file answer #9 is granted and any answer shall be filed on or before 4/20/2022. Motion hearing set for 4/7/2022 is stricken. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Motion by W. Anthony Andrews for presentment of before Honorable John Robert Blakey on 4/7/2022 at 11:00 AM. (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 9 MOTION by Defendants Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak, Jacque Bethke Tessendorf for extension of time to file answer or Otherwise Plead (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: This case has been reassigned to the calendar of the Honorable John Robert Blakey. The litigants are ordered to review and fully comply with all of this Court's standing orders, which are available on Judge Blakey's information page on the Court's official website: http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/. In addition, the parties must file a status report no later than 4/29/2022, using the model template set forth in this Court's standing order regarding Initial (or Reassignment) Status Conferences. Failure by any party to file the status report by the requisite deadline (either jointly or, if necessary, individually with an explanation as to why a joint report could not be filed) may result in a summary dismissal of the case for failure to prosecute, or an entry of default against any served defendant(s) failing to comply with this order. During the litigation, the attorneys must also appear at all hearing dates set by the Court or noticed by the parties. If an attorney has a conflict with a set court date, the attorney must notify Judge Blakey's Courtroom Deputy, Gloria Lewis, at (312) 818-6699. If appropriate, the Court will then reset the matter. Advising opposing counsel of a scheduling conflict is not a substitute for communicating directly with the Court. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 7 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER: Case reassigned to the Honorable John Robert Blakey for all further proceedings. Honorable Marvin E. Aspen no longer assigned to the case. Signed by Executive Committee on 3/15/2022. (lma, ) |
| Filing 6 MAILED Notice of Removal letter to counsel of record. (lma, ) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak, Jacque Bethke Tessendorf by Joshua Brandon Rosenzweig (Rosenzweig, Joshua) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak, Jacque Bethke Tessendorf by John Edward Motylinski (Motylinski, John) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak, Jacque Bethke Tessendorf by W. Anthony Andrews (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of Removal from Circuit Court of Cook County, IL, case number (2022L001160) filed by Michelle Hairston, Brandi Sedlak, Jacque Bethke Tessendorf Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-19241215. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Andrews, W.) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (jk2, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Marvin E. Aspen. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Maria Valdez. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jk2, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
